The BBC and devolution

The election coverage once again revealed the BBC’s disdain for England. We had many programmes and representations of the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish viewpoint and their separate issues but nothing on England. England once again did not exist as a country of the Union in the BBC handling of questions, guests and subjects. The same has been true of their remorseless anti Brexit coverage. We often hear of special problems for Northern Ireland or Scotland over Brexit, but never hear why England wants it and voted for it. Either the BBC should concentrate on being the UK’s national broadcaster on its main channels, or it must be fair to all four parts of our devolved country.

This matters. Let me remind the BBC that 84% of the population of the UK lives in England and pays their Licence fees. Many of us wish to hear English news and discussion of English matters yet we are denied this. Instead the BBC provides a BBC Wales and a BBC Scotland for those parts of the country, and doubles up by reproducing some of the Scottish and Welsh content and debate on BBC UK. It does neither for England.

When it came to the leader debates their attitude to devolution was a mess. They decided that they would give equal prominence to the SNP and the Welsh Nationalists, though neither of these parties could form a UK government or supply a Prime Minister because both only fielded candidates in a few Westminster seats. Yet they ignored the leaders of the main Ulster parties, who surely deserved attention if the Welsh and Scottish Nationalists got it? I could understand asking all party leaders to a big debate, or just inviting all party leaders who led parties fielding candidates in a majority of the Westminster seats. I could not see any justification for the choice of Leaders they did make.

What the BBC achieved by their seven way Leaders debate was an unruly shouting match between two parties that might provide a PM and form a government, three other national parties that were polling badly and two devolved regional parties out of the several who could have been invited who could clearly not provide a PM. The balance politically was by these means skewed heavily to the left of the voting patterns of the electors, with just two leaders representing the half of the electorate with Conservative and Eurosceptic leanings, and with five representing the other half. It meant there were far more pro EU representatives, out of line with the referendum results.

I made no complaints or remarks at the time. Media is a bit like the weather to candidates. You have to accept much of it and just make sure you have an umbrella handy, as they are out to rain on you. Now after the event I would suggest the BBC rethinks its whole approach to reporting devolution, and to choosing which people and issues to select for main election broadcasts. If they want to play up devolution then give England a voice and a role. Maybe it would be better to stick to the UK as the BBC’s country in a General Election, and do more to discuss the national issues and matters common to the whole country. The more non English lop sided devolution the BBC goes in for, the more it appears to be on the side of independence movements which are currently waning in popularity.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

@Richard1; Typicaly ill-informed right-wing nonsense! Sky’s market share is very large in both News & subscription channels too, your point was what?…

There is no Monopoly, just greater investment in what ever sector you want to highlight, what is more when ever anyone in the past accused Sky of having a Monopoly they were told not to be so stupid.

Also I’m sure that if the BBC did have a Monopoly in news, which they do not, I’m sure that Sky (and perhaps ITV) would rock the boat, but because Sky News has a massive market share in broadcast news along with the Sky having massive market share in other sectors, such as sole broadcast rights in sport and the latest films, rocking the boat is the last thing they actually want to do!

None of which can be legally watched unless you are prepared to fund the BBC (overwhelmingly the most powerful and influential UK media operation – not just the most powerful broadcaster).

The BBC is as biased socially and politically as the Guardian, but the Guardian’s operations have the respectability conferred by the fact that people can chose whether or not to pay for it. The BBC is a left wing scam. State broadcasting should be paired down by about 95%. That should include Channel 4.

@Peter; The BBC is not dominant in radio, it hasn’t been since probably the late the 1980s, defiantly since the roll-out of the full DAB service, and the BBC are loosing share almost monthly on that platform. Oh and you have not had to pay for a radio reception licence, “on pain of imprisonment”, since 1972… Duh!

@David; Just like you can’t lawfully watch Sky Sports channels without having to pay a subscription,. so lets scrap the TVL fee and subscription channels, I have no problem with that, but I know of someone who might and thus you’ll get no support from him…

@Edward2; That is what I have been saying, why should someone have to pay for 500+ Sky channels they do not want just to be legally allowed to watch the single channels they do – how is that any different to what you claim the TVL fee forces people do? Do try and be constant, otherwise your (political?) bias against the BBC is all to obvious!

@APL; Fine, get rid of the TVL fee, but then also get ride of subscription packages, make it law that every TV channel can be subscribed to individually and on it own if that is what the customer wants. Either create a level playing field for all or keep the status quo.

My reply to @David was just trying to explain why certain broadcasters do not want to rock the boat so to speak, unfortunately Eddie is more intent on picking arguments with me than understanding the issue.

Jerry: “Fine, get rid of the TVL fee, but then also get ride of subscription packages ”

Predictable that your solution to the problem of the unfair privileged position of the BBC is to turn every other broadcasting organisation into a facsimile of the BBC.

Like the typical leftie, you’ve only a hammer in your toolbox, so you treat everything like a nail. Bang bang bang! If that didn’t work, HIT IT HARDER!!

You claim the BBC is wonderful, that its programming is excellent. OK perhaps you are right, but the acid test is, will people voluntarily buy the BBC programming once you stop forcing them to buy BBC programming?

My guess is, no they won’t. I’m pretty sure you think the same too, else you’d be out there saying the BBC doesn’t need to be cosseted, its the best in the world and can compete against all competitors, …

John Archer; Just like you have to pay the VED if you want to use the roads, but might never use the motorways, just like you have to pay the Council Tax even though you might never use 90% of their services, just as you might have to pay for many Sky channels that you never watch just so you can watch the footy on Sky Sports 1, life stinks, get over it.

Try watching Sky subscription without paying, you’ll be in court just the same as had you not paid the TVL fee.

@libertarian; Except that the BBC does non of those. unlike some other broadcasters that could be named, were have all the first run films gone, were has almost all sport gone, not to free-to-air or free-to-view channels have they…

@APL; Sorry but you are wrong, what about web streaming (not all of which needs a TVL), but no, internet streaming companies can’t stream the content either because subscription broadcasters have the sole rights.

I’ve no idea what your response means in relation to what I posted , so I’ll try again. The CMA count ABUSE of a dominant position as a monopoly issue , not the monopoly itself. My point is under the terms of the act it would NOT be laughed out of court, the BBC would have to put up quite a legal fight. A dominant position under the terms of the competition act does NOT mean you have a monopoly on everything. It means you abuse a dominant ( i.e. greater than 50% ) position in a field of operation. i.e. News and current affairs for instance

@libertarian; The facts say otherwise Walter, you really do not have a first clue as to what the CMA would end up looking at. The BBC does not have a dominant position, and if you are really a terrestrial radio station owner you know that.

@APL; That’s a bit like complaining someone needs to pay for the electricity that powers the TV… For consumers there is no such thing as a free lunch when it comes to watching TV, we pay for the BBC, we pay subscriptions, we pay for commercial TV too.

I dont have a clue what the CMA would rule on you say. You do however as you started this thread by telling us !!! Lol

The BBC CLEARLY does have a dominant position in broadcast media, It has a dominate position by virtue of a compulsory licence for TV. Radio is a different matter, since the ending of the radio licence the BBC’s share of radio audience has plummeted . Exactly what will happen to their TV offering if the licence was removed

I know it irks you but I own 3 ( THREE ) thats more than two and less than four radio stations. I also occasionally broadcast for BBC too.

You are an expert on broadcast media ( as with your expertise on railway systems) because…..?

DUP manifesto wants radical change or cut to funding. Make it happen. It has extreme left wing views when it is supposed to be impartial. How could someone with extreme left wing like Paul Mason get a job at the BBC?

@Edward2; I suggest you actually read what Mr Mason has said about his political views rather than (as @Hope has) regurgitate how others (on the right) have interpreted his actions and writings. All you are doing is the same as some on the left do to our hots, claim that he must be a XYZ because he has views that are right of centre-right.

JR, off topic and of great concern is that May has sacked leavers in the Brexit team and replaced with remainers 11 days before negotiation, remember the stability mantra. Any change will be a disaster for your party. This reaching out narrative needs to be curtailed ASAP, IDS is spot on the money for his reasoning.

Austerity is over! What on earth is she doing now! Her left wing manifesto was widely accepted as a disaster and she is now replacing it with more left wing austerity is over. Why not stop useless vanity projects HS2, cut overseas aid etc. Is she that dull? Cameron beat Labour on economics. She wants to follow Corbyn and his Marxist chancellor, the papers will love that one after all the ridicule he has been given. Someone needs to get a grip of your party.

@Hope; Oh dear, fancy that, europhobes not getting the Brexit they wanted, but what the majority want. Not always getting your own way is part of life, stop being an even greater moaner than those Remoaners you keep complaining about! Or perhaps you would prefer Mr Corbyn to form a government, now of after another GE in a month, or at least later this year?

Yet Cameron even appointed the dire EUphile Lord Patton and then Lord Hall to it.

May also likes it just as it is. Pro EU, left wing, magic money tree and high tax pushing, climate alarmist, for ever bigger government, absurdly pro the NHS, anti landlord & antibusiness and endlessly PC. Calling for more and more regulation red tape every day.

The World at One today dug up John Major (yet again) to talk his tosh today. One of an endless stream of remainer, has been, dopes that the BBC have on speed dial.

It made me wonder which conservative PM (over my lifetime) I despise the most? Heath, Thatcher, Major, Cameron or May quite some competition. I suppose I can just about forgive Major and May (as they both have the excuse of total vacuity). Heath genuinely (but clearly idiotically) thought that the Common Market/EU and prices and incomes policies were a good thing for the UK (despite E Powell and other clearly explaining and showing why it would be a disaster). So clearly he was equally daft too.

I think I perhaps dislike Cameron and his side kick Osborne the most. They were both capable yet wasted two golden oportunities. They chose to pretended to be EU sceptic “low tax at heart Tories” but were the complete opposite in all their actions.

They had two sitting duck elections and they were eventually and rightly forced against their wills into a referendum. They then sloped the referendum pitch hugely and both lied to the electorate blatantly (to trick & threaten them into a remain vote as did May too of course).

But the tories have had only one decent PM in my lifetime and even she made massive mistakes. Why are Tory MPs so very useless at choosing leaders who have sensible policies and can win elections?

@DRW; Real Conservatives accepted that criticisms go with the job, that is why the real conservatives of the early 1960s accepted the legitimacy of programmes such as That Was The Week That Was (commonly know now as TW3) and all others, even if they did not personally like the content. Why did they do that, because they believed in democracy and free speech, many having fought for that right (and perhaps seen friends die) so that people, including you Rita Webb, can carry on saying what you wish for without fear.

Your comment says far more about yourself than it does real conservatives, or the BBC.

@alan jutson; When and were has factual news been interfered with, at least any more than on any other broadcaster?

I have said in the past if there is bias it should be removed but those standards have to be applied to all broadcasters. Had it been, that Sunday morning political magazine programme on Sky News and their recently ‘interview’ with Mr Corbyn would not have been transmitted – I do not here your own or others complaints about that programme, I wonder why…

@Edward2; My point was that both parties accepted the criticisms as political satire, not bias, they did not (in the end, effectively) do anything to neuter the BBC – did they. Sorry Eddie but you really do not have a first clue.

The BBC is only reflecting on what the establishment and the government think. If government can refer to England as, “the Regions ” and get away with it the comes as no aurprise that the BBC will do the same.

I have complained in the past to the BBC about the way in which England and English are treated. To their credit they did indeed change some items on their website and then only after demanding that they forward my complaint to one of the four UK regional governors. In this case it was the one for England. I bet many did not know that?

I think our kind host has heard many here demand reform of the BBC. And to that end the DUP have it in their manifesto reform I think many here agree with and is long overdue. But alas we gave a PM who is even more duff than the last one. So I do not hold out much hope.

We need our own parliament. I think it would be good to hold a consultative referendum in England on this. Parliament and the rest of the UK and the BBC will see that we are here and do matter.

At the same time though, the government is just as guilty of such neglect. The word ‘England’ is hardly ever used by politicians. If something as simple as renaming, say, the SoS for Local Govt as the SoS for England, and creating a new post within that Dept called the English First Minister who could pursue such things as media bias, it may change the BBC’s attitude.

If Parliament does not like the way the BBC is screwing so called democracy, and I agree it certainly seems biased, then do something about it.

We no longer get simple reporting of the facts any more, we get opinionated presenters on a whole range of subjects (not just politics) spouting their personal views, who most of the time seem to believe they are more important than the guests they invite to take part.

Indeed the BBC is appallingly biased – on the EU, on their total distain for England, on climate alarmism, on the magic money tree (Paul Mason type) of economic lunacy on the huge coversge the give to the Greens and the SNP in paticular. They are also, like the NHS, grossely unfair comptition to other broadcasters. Where is the competition authority. Vertually all their presenters are left wing, second rste art graduates with the sole exception of Andrew Neil who seem failry central. Almsost no one pointed our that Corbyn could never have delivered any of his economic lunacy without a magic money tree.

The BBC has clearly decided that any real Brexit is now dead in the water and are pushing this line relentlessly. I suspect that under dire socialist May they are right and whomever take over from her will struggle now too.

Five years of little more than limping on and clinging to power seems likely before losing an election in the John Major disaster style, even after punishment Manifesto May has followed punisnment budget Osborne into the dustbin of history.

Will they even be able to get the constituency boundaries changed to fair ones to limit the damage?

Time to terminate the licence fee and allow the BBC to find its own way in the commercial world. Taxpayers can keep or spend the money they save as they please.
We don’t need compulsory payments to an organisation that is clearly politically biased, spending it on dubious “talent”.

The English voice is small and diffident, always willing to defer to more strident tones. We’re supposed to be a democracy but it can feel more like a brontocracy – government of the noisiest.

How different if some figure of national eminence had the authority to say, “You cannot do this! England will not stand for it!”

Oddly, it appears there is an English National Party. Round whose kitchen table they hold their party conferences I cannot say. Perhaps when the ENP achieves the gravitas and mass appeal of the Monster Raving Loonies, the English will again be a political force in their own land.

Then everyone with no Sky box and only Freeview/Freesat, would be required to buy either new tv’s or set top boxes, because the current technology cannot handle taking payment for the BBC. It was specifically set up this way because of the way the BBC is funded and the politicians were happy with it as they saw it being funded this way in perpetuity.

Pity the Chanellor who says ‘From January first 2018, your tellies won’t work and you need to buy another one, and then pay a subscription of say £40 per month and watch endless adverts and talent shows.

“Then everyone with no Sky box and only Freeview/Freesat, would be required to buy either new tv’s[1] or set top boxes[2],”

Why?

But suppose [1]. Nearly everyone in the country must have by now bought a flat screen TV. The vast majority of them now come with an integrated digital TV.

Which reminds me, since the analogue TV signal was phased out, everyone who wants to watch broadcast TV does have to have a set top box, or a new TV.

[2] Not sure why Sky is the gold standard. In any case reducing the market privileged of the BBC might just open the market to newer more dynamic broadcasters. The BBC is like Japanese knotweed, it has grown to massive proportions, and cuts out the light to anything trying to grow in its vicinity. Which is to say anywhere in the UK

My freeview digital tele in France has channels which are withheld as subscription only and even have free programmes sometimes, then charge for the good ones. BBC Fake News and current propaganda could be charged and the unfortunate viewer would be given a code to enter if they had Guardian views which needed reinforcing.

The BBC’s smug and inappropriate response may well be, as on the occasion of your last complaint, that it employs “extraordinary journalists” which of course it does not.

Mr. Cameron did not take his chance to do anything about the BBC and Mrs. Weak and Vacillating likely will not get the chance so all we can do is deny that wretched shadow of the BBC of yesteryear the oxygen of funding.

JR is right, and could have said more. While the English remain unrepresented we will be taken for granted at the BBC and elsewhere. We are out of sight and out of mind – a phrase which my auto-translator once very wisely turned into Greek for “invisible idiot”.

So here it begins. Your party made a total mess of the election and off you go, looking for people to blame – anyone except your own pinched-face, economically illiterate manifesto. Hard Brexit was put before the people of Britain and rejected. Grow up and deal with it. Your party’s fault, not the BBC’s

The BBC will not correct itself, but dismiss today’s diary piece as a right wing rant. It will have to be dealt with by government and the most effective way would be to hit them in the pocket. At half the licence fee or no licence fee the BBC would not be in a position to employ most of it’s Guardianista staff. No other broadcaster has the benefit of a guaranteed income, let the BBC join them.

Thanks to an appallingly run general election we have an ultimately weak government, so dealing with the BBC will be of a very low priority. Those of you who are asked to take part in their broadcasts should go for their interviewers and cut them down to size.

As reported in the Express, is there any truth in the DUP wanting Nigel Farage honoured and in the Brexit negotiating team. You could do yourselves a lot of good with the electorate you abandoned during the election.

Cutting the licence fee is the best idea to cut them down to size as they do far too much. Subscription is a technical non-runner and if the BBC carried adverts this would damage the independents.
Why is no-one worrying about ITV or Sky bias – there is plenty of that, or Fox or RT or plenty of others and no, they don’t come free – the price is subscription or on your shopping bill. Being private does not ensure even handedness.

“England once again did not exist as a country of the Union in the BBC handling of questions, guests and subjects. “

Utter nonsense and you know it, yes there was no single “This is England” styled programmes on the BBC’s networked broadcasts but there were regional/local broadcasts every week, and sometimes more, not to mention, along with ITV, regional news programmes at least every weekday -something Sky, Ch4 & Ch5 do not have, so where is the criticisms of those broadcasters, especially the first who have the TX platform resources to offer regional TV is they wanted to?

As for that 7 way debate, yes the format was cr@p, but hay that’s democracy for you, are you suggesting that you dislike democracy? Far better would have been a two-way debate between the two party leaders who were realistically going to form the next government, Mr Corbyn was always ready, he only pulled out of such a debate because the other leader refused to accept the broadcasters offer – can’t blame anyone but your leader Mr Redwood, stop blaming the BBC for your parties cr@p campaign! Nor do you criticise the very similar formate of debate that were found on ITV and Sky – why not I wonder, well actually the right wing of your party have made no secrete of their desire to at least castrate the BBC, and indeed any broadcaster who is willing to show a Conservative government in an unfavourable way, enormous pressure was applied upon the BBC in the mid to late 1980s, Thames TV is widely considered to have paid the price in the early 1990s franchise round (the rules of which were changed by the second Thatcher era Broadcast Bill) due to their This Week programmes.

That said, regarding your comment about how the BBC and Nb>any broadcaster deals with devolution, I tend to agree, but that is something politicians need act upon by way of law and/or regulation because much lays in the lap of the DfCMS and Ofcom and how the Freeview (and Freesat) platform is managed rather than what the broadcasters can do technically without massive infrastructure and employment cost increases.

If the right wing think that abolishing the TVL fee, in effect making the BBC a commercial and/or subscription broadcaster will change how it depicts politicians and their parties they are mistaken, in fact judging by both ITV and Ch4 now and in the past. I suspect it could actually make the problems of the right-wing far worse, at least now as constrained by the TVL fee settlement [1] the BBC can be starved of funds – I believe Labour used that approach during the 1970s, having believed since the 1960s the BBC to be grossly biased to the political right…

[1] a parliamentary issue, so in the hands of the government of the day

PS, there is no consistency in reCAPCHA, it’s not a case of picking what matches the question but guessing what you think the person setting the question thinks they were looking at. I also suspect that it is breaking UK disability access laws [1], as a politician you really should find a better solution to bot generated Spam.

[1] The audio questions are distorted, thus those with both sight and hearing problems ate stuffed

@Edward2; Regional programmes focus on, err, the region, unless that region is perhaps a metropolitan area, for example BBC London is of course London centric. Thank you Eddie for proving that you have obviously not watched much if any BBC (or indeed ITV) regional programming!.. I live miles away from our hosts constituency, and county, but we share the same BBC South region, thus I know what people think in Berkshire just as they know what people think in my own area.

In any case, the BBC main network channels are basically BBC England centric, why do you think BBC Scotland, Wales and NI had to be created in the first place. Find a clue, not a political rant!

Oh and as I said, where is the “ITV England” channel, were is the “Sky England” channel, why is it only ever the BBC that the right bleat about.

How is that relevant?
The argument is about the BBC having separate TV stations for the devolved UK nations but not for England
Your pedantic argument is to say the BBC has regional programmes
Which isn’t the same thing
Saying Sky has no separate offerings for the individual nations is a complete irrelevance.

Why do you think Wales, Scot and NI devolved government have been pushing for their own News programmes, because the BBC News Channel and BBC1 News is England centric – and why shouldn’t Sky be made to have Sky News England, Sky News Wales, Sky News Scotland and Sky News NI, even more so if the BBC should, otherwise next you’ll be on your political hobby-horse complaining that the BBC has a monopoly…. Do feel free to find a clue Eddie, rather than just party political ignorant rants.

Disdain from the BBC is only a minor part of the problem. As you know NO political party in Westminster recognises the existence of England.
All parties fawn over the joy of devolution to Scotland and Wales, yet continue to deny democratic equality to England.
No one speaks for England, no one has the will to differentiate between Britain and England.
Cameron’s English votes for English laws has been a total failure now swept under the carpet.
We are the deliberately forgotten nation of the union.
Shame on all of Westminster.

” no one has the will to differentiate between Britain and England”
No one has the guts. We are called racists and right wingers if you even fly the Cross of St George I bet the kids in English schools never hear that they are English If (God forbid) Jeremy and his comrades get power they will try and change our countries name they have tried before with the Assemblies. Prescott with his” no such place as England” except when it comes to taking our money.

I’ve asked this question before, and it’s NOT rhetorical, and I’ve never received any answer, which might be significant.
“Is England the only country in the world, other than obvious dictatorships, that has no parliament of its own, but has to share one with neighbouring countries?”
Please let me know if there is, because the situation is making me more and more annoyed.

I agree with every word you have printed here JR. The BBC are a disgrace, like a fifth column infiltrating our homes and brainwashing our young. It must stop. I am so fed up with their one sided views whenever there is a political programme on that I just don’t watch anymore. You always know the outcome without having to watch. It simply isn’t right that we all have to pay for the licence but we don’t get a balanced view. Who will be brave enough in government though to stand up to them?

“The Dumping Ground” on CBBC is a hoot. They stopped showing that sort of programme on Russian TV when the Soviet Union ceased to exist. Its not bad language, sex and violence I have to worry about with children’s TV its the blatant PC agenda.

The BBC should be a subscription service today, it’s that simple. Other companies manage without public money, why should we be forced to buy something we don’t want, or watch. Isn’t that against our human rights? To be forced to buy. ( Sorry to sound like a Liberal ) I’m fed up subsidising the channel for those that like the BBC .

We need to make the BBC self funding. I accept that they are politically biased towards the left and anti Brexit but I am sick to the back teeth that I am forced to pay for this under threat of being locked up. If it is true that they receive millions of pounds from the EU each year to spout their propaganda then that is a disgrace. I think the time has come when we need an English parliament. If Brexit is fudged then I think we will see an English Nationalist party formed in the same way that the Scots and Welsh have theirs. I don’t think this will end well.

Yes the BBC has taken EU money – 2 million pounds over the 3 years to 2015 according to the Telegraph – don’t know any later figures, but it’s likely to be similar.

The money is by way of grants for advancing technology, such as ultra HD and 3D (which is now defunct) and cannot be used for programming or news gathering. It has to be accounted for. It is generally accepted that coverage of the Brexit referendum was impartial.

In 2014 a Spectator article reported that an FOI process had to be followed to force the BBC to disclose what EU funding it received 2011 – 2013 and how it was used. The BBC refused to self declare and would not specify in detail how the money was used except that £1m of it had been spent on programming.

If they had nothing to hide why so coy and where is the detailed accounting?

From what coverage I saw on the Beeb upto and during the referendum they were heavily biased in their referendum reporting and programmes so am interested how you define “generally accepted”.

It’s all in the BBC accounts if you want to see it. Just because it’s in the papers doesn’t make it true. Anything given to a newspaper is like to be distorted.

Bias is subjective, but an analysis of time etc given to each side was pretty even. Presumably you didn’t actually watch every hour that was broadcast? The Leave side said it was fair. I’m pretty sure JR said as much as well – no doubt he will say if it’s not so.

Do something about this vile, anti British, organization – this year. This has gone on for far to long. They are now giving their opinion as news on a 24 hour rolling basis. It is completely unwatchable.

I do wish someone would organize a boycott of the licence fee until this serious issue with our democracy is solved.

It’s not just their opinions in so-called news programmes. More subtle is the way in which they infiltrate quietly their views into nearly every kind of programme, presenting them as facts.
As a result, history documentaries trumpet the virtues of every other race, while presenting the British as the villains of history. No Nature programme can last long before warning us of the dangers of Climate change. The poor are always virtuous, or they have good reason to be violent and disturbed. The rich are inevitably sly and greedy. The old are feeble minded and stuck in the past.
If you’re young, black, foreign and poor you are absolutely always an admirable character. In the modern way, you tick all the boxes. How absurd.

They even had Climate Change propaganda in the Chelsea Flower Show about heat resisting plants.No mention of the rise being 1deg C since the industrial revolution, the Hiatus or the fact that plants are growing much better in the CO2 fertilizer.

What matters is the disdain the Conservative Party has shown for the young.

Contributors have tried to explain here for years that a combination of hiking student fees, hiking house prices by stupid Help to Buy schemes, causing property shortages by ridiculous planning controls, importing cheap labour, jacking up asset prices with low interest rates and imposing higher taxes via NEST, NI have ALL now come home to roost.

Wearing baseball caps, gay marriage laws and hugging hoodies doesn’t cut it. The young are on the march and they’re not going away.

Exactly. The politicians and the bankers screwed up the economy but they are making our young, well England’s young anyway, pay for their mistakes. What a way to start their working lives with these huge debts hanging over them plus let’s not forget the exorbitant 6.1% interest. Apparently 78% will never pay these debts off but it doesn’t alter the fact they will have to live with these debts for years to come. So what is the point of them. The Government can borrow billions for foreign aid and they can give billions to the banks, much of which goes to the greedy bankers themselves and yet when it comes to England’s young, who have done nothing wrong, they don’t give a toss. Our politicians all enjoyed free higher education themselves and now they have pulled up the ladder.

I have never voted Labour in my life but I can well understand the appeal to young voters and they are not going away. If this Tory Government had any sense, which it clearly doesn’t, it would end this discrimination against England’s young. After all doesn’t England normally vote Tory. IDIOTS!

Theresa May has not got it has she!
With the exception of Michael Gove I am appalled at the “new” cabinet appointments, and Gavin Barwell ?? Isn’t he a hard remainer? Didn’t his electorate just kick him out?
Why doesn’t she just put Gina Miller in charge of Brexit and have done with it.
I have found it hard to believe the conspiracy theorists who insist that destroying our hand in delivering what the country voted for was the ultimate aim. Now I am starting to think that they have a point.

Better believe it, that is why they a short on brexiters in her cabinet.

Gove set off with a flyer. Telling President Trump to have a a rethink about CC.
The money it is going to cost for little or no return suggest that man has not done a full in depth investigation. Engage brain , do in depth research then and only then open mouth. Not a good start Mick.

Off topic but very current. May’s reshuffling looks as if it is putting remainers in charge of the Brexit negotiations. Her new chief of staff said he was physically sick when he heard we had voted to leave.looks like the start of a pro EU stitch up.

I now read a large group of the Brexuteers were reassured that the policy had not changed and we would continue to sim to look after our own trade agreements. Presumably you were in that, good. We need you and trust you to do the right thing.

Not so much a start as the continuation of a process which has been going on for a year. I suppose the idea is to make us all so fed up of the whole wretched business, that we shrug our shoulders and say, “I just can’t be bothered any more.”
And, you know, I think it’s beginning to work.

Excellent piece. The 7-leaders debate was a disgrace with the audience packed with leftists shrieking at Amber Rudd. But the BBC, like John Bercow, will be beneficiaries of the failure of the Conservatives to achieve a majority. There will be no change in the roelentless political bias.

Minorities are always over-represented in the BBC’s ‘discussion programmes’, which should be properly named ‘government bashing programmes’. The BBC always claim that audiences are representative, by which it means 50/50. But when an issue is split 60/40 nationally, a 50/50 audience is a programme bias!

The point was made elsewhere that if the Greens in the leaders’ debate had been represented according to national support, then the number of Greens in the audience would have been 0.6 of a person!

The answer is simple! Stop the State funding of the BBC. Introduce it to the freedom of the market place where it can earn its keep via subscriptions, like other broadcasters.

Looking at Mrs May’s reshuffle you would think she had achieved that elusive three digit majority last week. The part of the party that would attract a voter like me seems to be have been thoroughly marginalised. Just like the restored Bourbons the Conservative Party seems to have learned nothing and will soon be consigned to the trash heap of history.

Yes, but the FPTP voting system has given UKIP the grand total of zero MPs.
Choose your fight, BBC or voting system?
If you want anything to possibly change, I do not think writing on this blog is of much use (Oops, just what I have just done).

The BBC is a side issue now. What we have at the head of the Conservative party is a leader and a PM who is determined to derail Brexit. She is determined to circumvent the result of the EU referendum held last year

What we have is a Conservative party that is gutless, cowardly and a disgrace

We have a PM in May who is an arch remainer. Moreover she is slowly stepping back from Brexit

It stinks and the Tory party will back her and betray the people who voted in their majority to leave the EU in its entirety

Brexit has been derailed – by the will of the people.
The Tories campaigned for hard Brexit. They lost their majority. Hard Brexit is dead, and our sovereign Parliament will now decide if there is to be Brexit at all

The BBC contimues to be anti Brexit. Only yesterday they interviewed the MD of Aston Martin, seeking his response to a suggestion that he would be disadvantaged by having a tariff put on his vehicles exported to the EU in the event of a “hard” Brexit.
The interviewer did not even question which is Aston Martin’s biggest market (probably the UK), and who their main competitors are (Porsche, Mercedes BMW) who would all have a 10% tariff on their exports to the UK, and have to compete with a lower valued pound.

So, it’s back to “Speaking for England” then JR. Still, you did play a good part for Brexit, from a safe seat mind you. Alas, “no deal is better than a bad deal” is now a busted flush. I think the Scottish Conservative 12, could be a bigger problem than the DUP 10. What if the Sinn Féin 7, decide to get on the boat to Westminster? Was this snap general election, a Metropolitan Elite Remainers Party; master stroke application of Chaos Theory?

So how bad would the bad deal on offer have to be, before you agreed that it would in fact be better to have no deal at all? Or do you think that there is no possible deal which would be so bad that even you would decide to reject it? If, for example, the EU said “You can have some of what you want, this and that, but you must pay us a trillion pounds a year”, would you say that this was still better than no deal? Or would that only cut in for you if their demand was for ten trillion pounds a year?

No deal is the ultimate bad deal and the Treasury knows it. The sooner Phil Hammond’s Treasury gets back in charge of this pantomime of a government, the sooner he could prevent the UK committing economic suicide.

That could come sooner with the rate personnel are exiting the Dept for Exiting the EU!

As Frans Timmermans said yesterday, in a speech referring to Brexit, “… there are only two kinds of countries in Europe. Small countries and those that don’t yet know they are small”.

I understand that both UKIP and the DUP advocated the abolition of the BBC licence fee in their respective manifestos. Such an outcome would have compelled the BBC to find alternative funding models if the organisation was to continuie its existance.

What did the Conservative manifesto state about the BBC? My understanding is that there was no reference to the BBC in that woeful document so there is no point in bellyaching about the BBC now after the election. Furthermore this government has approved an increase in the licence fee so you are feeding the very animal that is also devouring you.

Personally I cannot see any requirement for a public sector broadcasting organisation in the 21st century nor would I pay a subscription fee to watch/listen to its output. The BBC may have a role to play via its worldwide radio transmissions but I support the policy requiring the BBC to find its own funding rather than via compulsive taxation.

Cameron & Osborne had two sitting duck elections and golden opportunities to run for three + terms and return the UK to a sound economy, to escape the EUSSR and restore sound public finances, they failed dismally indeed they did not even try. This due to them being pro EU socialists at heart – and despite pathetic & dishonest claims to the contrary.

T May, post the Brexit vote, inherited an even better position – once she had ditched her silly “remain” agenda. But alas she came out as another tax increasing, high regulation, PC, interventionist with a love for pointless vanity projects, green crap and endless waste. Then she elected for another sitting duck election. But she decided to do it offering a punishment budget against a fake Father Christmas figure proffering rubber cheques to anyone who might vote for him. She even put hunting foxes in the manifesto (when 80%+ are against it)!

How can a politician get to 60 and yet understand nothing of politics or economics. She campaigned like a daft & bossy robot. Programmed with about six phrases. Let us hope they chose a sensible leader for once this time. Though it is hard to see how they can recover from this dire position before the next election even if they are sound.

Trump has walked away because no deal is better than a bad deal, thus he is waiting for a better deal, which he will get in due course rest assured.

Then all the others will think they have won because he has come back, little realising that he has in fact got a better deal than he had before.

Its called a sensible means of negotiation, something the UK has just made more difficult for itself with the election result, which was not about Brexit at all, but the robbing of people of their houses when in need of help, injecting more money into our schools , NHS, and Police, and cancelling student debt by the thousands.

It is time to break away from the left-right socialist axis of politics, which is where the BBC tries to place everyone and why Mrs May tried to be more ‘left’ than Corbyn.

Where are the political voices for individual achievement, freedom of expression and personal responsibilities? Are these ‘values’ totally missing from the ‘creatives’ that thrive in and around the BBC?

Give us a dream, a vision to inspire us! Rise above the swamp of socialism!

P.S. The policies of Le President, of whom the BBC approves, (well he isn’t British is he!), appear to be a mix of Austerity and Thatcherism.

It’s time the BBC were held to account for their bias and lack of ” Englandism “. The sectored management that plans and executes their programmes has been its own independence and decision makers for a long long time . I have posted before my experience with 3 of their Chairmen who had complained to me of their inability to change and influence the management of the BBC . One of them – who had brought in management consultants to assist his role , subsequently resigned over this problem ( I don’t want to mention his name for obvious reasons ; his management record prior to the BBC role was impeccable . He had previously tackled Union problems very successfully . He had been a client of mine for many years .

I no longer watch BBC Channels if I can avoid them . I prefer Sky News who definitely are broad minded and ” equal ” in the way they present events . Thank goodness – as an “Oldie “, I do not have to pay a licence fee ; if I did I would be more active in my complaints . On one occasion when I did complain about the broad accent of one of their prominent broadcasters whom I could not understand , I received a reply stating it was BBC’s policy to embrace different regional accents to maintain audience balance !. Gone are the days when they could be trusted .

I do not own a TV; I do not watch the BBC or pay a TV licence. It is an utter disgrace that politicians do nothing but moan about the BBC and then renew its Charter without any attempt to hold it to its Charter obligations. It’s just another example of how useless the Tories are; they are not conservative; they are not patriotic and they are not competent to run the country. We need PR so that new parties can arise that would remove the trash that uses the BBC as their personal propaganda arm paid for by everyone else.

It’s apparent that Mrs May watches the BBC news and has wrongly concluded that the Conservatives lost the election because of a non existent ‘hard Brexit’.
The same corporation that sneeringly refers to Nigel Farage as a ‘populist’ never uses the same term to describe Mr Corbyn with his magic money tree and shameless bribery.

In her mind her failure has absolutely nothing to do with the vacuous ‘a country that works for everyone’, robotic ‘strong and stable leadership’ and her long record of getting away with complete and utter failure at the home office.

Mrs May – ‘I got us into this mess and I’ll get us out of it’

She is the political equivalent of a dose of Strychnine to the Conservative party. How can the party recover by being given a stronger dose of the same poison that made it sick?. Moving further to the left with Damian Green

May is a politically correct, Labour leaning Blair admirer who had no answer to Jeremy Corbyn because she agrees with much of what he stands for. I feel sick when I hear about Conservative Mp’s ‘banging the table’ before being addressed by her ..they should have been throwing rotten eggs and telling her to sit down.

An apology is something you do when you step on a toe..not change the course of British history by giving a leg up to a hardline socialist because you are too wooden headed to listen to a broad range of views!.

The BBC is in buoyant mood today having learned that a grand coalition of Tories and Labour are going to stitch up the Brexit negotiations.
No doubt our good deal will be increased subscriptions and the loss of rebate.
Continuing in the Customs union and single market with all that entails and probably a tacit agreement to join the Euro within 5 years.
The 10 million ukip voters who moved to Labour and the Tories will be very angry.
Welcome home Nigel.

One conclusion that I have come to after this election is that Labour always go for the young vote by promising them sweeties. They believe everything they are told by the left and totally ignore the “old codgers” who speak from experience. The only up side to his is that after another labour government runs out of money and the unions hold sway they will come to see the error of their ways and in thirty years time they will then become the ones who “don’t know what they are talking about” to a new generation of youngsters.
Doesn’t help the country one jot, but I suppose that is just the way it has to be.

“If you have been voting for politicians who promise to give you goodies at someone else’s expense, then you have no right to complain when they take your money and give it to someone else, including themselves.”

I think it has. It’s a cycle I can see no end to. Democracy , alas, is a system when people can vote for other people’s money- and of course, they do. We either have it, or we go for something much more dangerous.

Well said Dr JR. Also of concern (to me anyway) is the extent to which English culture and tradition is withering on the vine in mainstream media and in education. In my view this has come about because of the “metrocentric” dominance of London and a misplaced concern for encouraging multiculturalism at the expense of any acknowledgement of an English culture. Only in England does it appear to be an “either/or” choice: multiculturalism seems to thrive perfectly well alongside Scots, Irish and Welsh tradition in those countries. For a start, I would love to see children in English schools learning our English folk songs and learning to play traditional tunes on fiddles and (as I did) on recorders. I believe there’s great emphasis in Welsh, Irish and Scottish schools on learning and appreciating traditional music, song and dance- I wish we had that in England too. Soon nobody under 50 will know a single English folk song!

We no longer have the “strong” part after the election. Now it seems “stable” has left the building too. With Brexit talks a week away why is Mrs May reshuffling the Brexit department and replacing leavers with remainers??

We are ALWAYS talking about this – it is always just talk. Why would the BBC have to change when they dont have to! Politicians are not actually going to take a grip of the situation and seriously do something about it and BBC program Managers/Directors are fully aware of this consequently are not bothered by criticism and continue to do what they do on the principle (to their way of thinking) ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it’. Whingeing about the BBC has now become BORING – leave it or better still DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

It is time the BBC was restructured – sack all the management and make people apply who can show they know the difference between socialism and honesty.

The Tories have turned a blind eye to so many things that they could have made better…and now these misbegotten are either pursuing the destruction of anything good within the UK or actively working against anything that is decent and honest.
To name but a few:
All socialists and communists including labour party;
Trade unions;
Socialist lecturers and teachers;
BBC.

It is socialism and indoctrination of our young by socialists that has done for us – When will right thinking people get this?

Just three sound ones the first two and Gove (though he had now become a socialist even calling for VAT on private school fees).

Doubtless the mad Tory party will choose another useless, lefty remainer & loser in the end. Boris is the only one I can see who might actually win the next election and even he will find it very hard indeed now May has blown it with her incompetence.

Looks like we are now stuck with the appalling speaker John Bercow too – all thanks to May’s incompetence. Is there any good news at all from this – other than we have not got Corbyn’s economic lunacy quite yet – just May & Hammonds daft socialism light.

The news and comment side of the BBC should be spun off into a private company funded by subscription. The present arrangement with licence fees is like being forced to subscribe to the Guardian before being allowed to read any other newspaper. And it comes across as the broadcast arm of the Guardian.

Mr Redwood, I agree with what you write about the BBC,but there are now more pressing issues i.e. this ‘weak and wobbly’ Prime Minister is planning a ‘soft brexit’ to appease the DUP. I hope you will resist this with all the powers at your disposal.

According to reports in the press, she is considering a joint approach with Labour for the brexit negotiations. How on earth can she allow Benn and Starmer anywhere near these negotiations. The useless woman must go now.

She doesn’t have a lot of choice as she needs them to do anything. It all seems so wrong that 10 ministers have the total say over what goes on in England and the rest of the UK when what the DUP want is not what we voted for.

I totally agree . For many years we have been ostracised in favour of everyone else . This is not just the BBC. It is every organisation around . We have tried to be politically correct but have been martyrs to our own Country .I understood that Theresa May was invited to the debate but refused. Is this so?
Again we see the results in the Nursing field of how we damaged our Country. Most of our British Nurses were put down , put out of the NHS and had to scrap for single hours whilst hoards of European Nurses were invited in. Due to this ill feeling towards our own , lack of places for our own and subsequent reliance of European Nurses we are now witnessing how the last 2 decades has spoiled the NHS in the interests of others. Brexit has meant that there is a 94% loss of applications for European Nurse to come here. I do not blame the Europeans . I blame those who made us highly qualified and senior Nurses ready to take part in Directing our workforce initially .
This blog of yours should be sent to the BBC Dr Redwood.

In July 2016 HMG announced the end of bursaries for those wishing to become nurses, so perhaps no surprise that applications from UK residents fell by 23%.

What is of more concern is that in just three years nearly half of the nursing workforce is eligible to retire.

During the EU Referendum campaign it surprised me how every person of Indian heritage I saw interviewed in vox pops was in favour of Leave. And after Raab’s comments – mentioned on here a few days ago – my conclusion is that post-Brexit the nursing shortfall will be made up in part by tens of thousands of Indians, etc ed

Perhaps some one can explain to me why nurses need to spend three years at university in order to gain a degree; then a lot of them don’t want to get their hands dirty. Clearly we need some technically-qualified nurses to run things like kidney-machines, but they are in the minority. And also, what about the needs of the countries from which all these foreign nurses are imported?

I was an R.G.N. for 35 years and trained in the Hospital school of Nursing before Nursing became a University degree. Nursing then was vocational, we simply wanted to do it even though the pay was poor – but it was very rewarding.
Nowadays the UNI qualified Nurses have care assistants to do the menial jobs whilst they do the mountains of paperwork that has appeared in the NHS over the last 20 years. — All in the name of progress !

Sky News interviewed Mr Redwood yesterday after the 1922 Committee meeting. He explained that it was not a question of Hard or Soft Brexit. He indicated that the Labour Party had accepted we should leave the EU and Single Market. Directly afterwards the same interviewer stated that Mr Redwood had said, incorrectly, the Labour Party was in favour of Hard Brexit. So it is not just the BBC which needs an editor and proper management.

The crowds in studios for debates are imbalanced and even when seemingly balanced you see pro-Labour people oddly seated in blocks and five times more loud and whooping than the others. In reality it is not true Labour voters shout and scream like football hooligans so where the BBC gets these mobs is a worry.

The BBC is riddled with middle class socialists and luvvies who opt to be self employed so that they can pay less tax. They then emote about the poor and how the rich (other than themselves) should be forced to pay more taxes.

I now find watching the BBC news is like listening to a party political broadcast.

BTW, do the Brexit supporting Conservative MPs now regret following the BBC/Labour/Lib Dems/Greens mantra that UKIP no longer needed to exist now that the country had voted in a referendum to leave the EU ?

Corporation Tax (CT) will be reduced to 12.5% next April anyway, as an English favour to NI. This being done to match it to the Republic’s CT rate. It won’t happen if there is no NI Executive to delegate the taxing power to.

Mind you, the last time I looked, the NI Executive was spending £24 billion and taxing about £14 billion, a “budget deficit” of about 30% – if it was a sovereign currency issuer, which it is not. Hence, NI costs the Westminster Treasury, about twice as much per head as in England.

BTW. Have you noticed that these devolved politicians are now referring to “English” Conservatives

Clearly we are all biased and on many issues take a partisan position when airing our opinions on them. It is one of our basic if somewhat less endearing human qualities of which unfortunately we have many and few of the more endearing kind. The BBC was incorporated to resist this impulse. A forlorn hope as time and events have so often proven. Your article highlighting a few of the recent examples of the bias being practised by that organisation.

It should have been obvious at the BBC’s inception that it could not maintain impartiality or present balanced views that the BBC’s charter enjoined it’s employees to follow. So the BBC should never have been allowed to participate in airing programs that can be controversial or may be used to influence. It was not and when the dangers of not doing so became apparent action to strip it of it’s powers to do so should have been enacted. They were not and the consequences of which we see in the continuous spewing of BBC content that is designed to make us think as that organisation believes we should. Better late than never it should be done now although it will take a brave government to do so. Especially as the left and many vested interests including the BBC who benefit greatly will fight tooth and nail against any attack on it’s current structure to maintain the current status quo.

Asking the BBC nicely to change their ways and offer the news in a neutral fashion will not work when it’s run by luvvie lefties. Tell them you are putting forward a private members bill to abolish the license fee because of their non neutral viewpoints, that will make them take notice.

Mr Redwood, I suspect the reason is that the English are more likely to vote Conservative/UKIP and more likely to have voted to leave the eu.

The English are not the BBC’s kind of people.

Of course it was the BBC above all other media that was promoting the absurd idea of different version of Brexit and now it has managed to contort the general election result where the two main winners want to leave the eu (including the single market) into a vote against its make-believe “hard brexit”.

So is any real Brexit now dead? Thanks to ex( ?) remainer “Brexit mean Brexit” May? Labour are now favourites to win the next election, and with quite a low chance of not having any early election. Surely a real Brexit is doomed and the economy is doomed if Labour get in.

Also Theresa May had indicated that austerity (living within ones means) is over. Sure dear, are you going to repeal the law of gravity and other laws physics too? Perhaps a law making everyone live to at least 150 while you are at it?

The problem with “austerity” is that we are still not living within our means, so it as a false austerity: and also that it is obvious to anyone , of any political colour, that most fairly well-off people have done very well in the last 10 years, whereas whatever austerity there has been has been for the less well-off, or pensioners who live off their savings interest.

Sky, ITV and Channel 4 are all just as bad. In fact Sky News is hardly a proper news channel, it is more like a campaigning organisation systematically fabricating and propagating its own false version of reality in the hope of pushing the government into doing what it wants. There is no hint of impartiality and very little journalistic integrity. Of course the difference is that the BBC is funded by a compulsory levy on viewers, but really that is the only difference.

True Dennis, but if I pay for something I want the choice. I can turn off the other channels knowing I did not pay for it. I no longer watch BBC news or current affairs or political programmes. Fake news.

If the BBC was privatised, how do you think the Murdoch media, Sky etc, would take to having to share corporate advertising money with the BBC? Who do you think has told Mrs May to put Michael Gove back into the Cabinet?

Gove, the former Education Secretary, who stood unsuccessfully against May for the Conservative leadership, having lost the argument over the handling of extremism in schools.

The Michael Gove that worked for the News Corp-owned Times, before entering politics, and returned to the paper following his departure from government last year.

The DUP are real conservatives, they don’t want to write off years of tradition. I would support their stance on both gay marriage and abortion. They are totally correct in wanting to abolish the BBC, no wonder a BBC commentator referred to them as dinosaurs. I’m suddenly in favour of them (both the DUP and dinosaurs!).

The strange thing is that Mrs May had the opportunity to go down in history as Lady Thatcher mark 2. Instead she will go down alongside Heath Major and Cameron. What has happened to this once great party?

Bingo! Mr Redwood, you are right.
The Referendum was even more of a scandal. We had several choices: Remain and be sucked into the Eurozone; become an Associate Member where we cough up and get told what to do – or else; get chucked out and that means no trade at all of any sort; join the European Free Trade Association against the will of the Norwegian Prime Minister and Foreign Minister…
None – none – of this was discussed at all.
Now all sorts of people are boldly declaring what the British people really want.
They simply make it up as they go along.
Nobody knows.

When Johnson said we would still have access to the Single Market we did not expect all the current benefits – but that a desire to trade goods and services would still be there.

I think that’s what 100% of the people I know thought too (Remainers or Leavers.)

None were clearer to the people on what Leave meant than those who spread Project Fear.

‘Hard’ or ‘Soft’ did not present until after the referendum. This was concocted by the BBC and by Remain after Leave had won.

I would have prefered ‘Full’ or ‘Partial’ Brexit as ‘Hard’ or ‘Soft’ has a negative subliminal bias against leaving the EU before we even start the debate – the fact is that the whole question is another bite of the cherry for Remainers.

Our gravest danger is a hobbled Leave negotiation and that’s precisely what we have now.

As the latest Sky fable is that having lost their Commons majority the Tory leadership is about to “soften” Brexit to the point where we may not actually leave the EU – apparently only that hard-bitten Leaver Theresa May has yet to be convinced by the arguments of her cabinet colleagues – it might be helpful to recollect that at present the main opposition Labour party, with 262 MPs, will not be opposing our withdrawal from the customs union and the single market, as helpfully summarised here:

…except for this reportedalliance between pro EU Tory MPs and many Labour MPs. It seems that the Remainer politicians the left liberal media have completely stolen the initiative and are setting the agenda, getting it firmly into people’s minds that they do not want Brexit and that this was what the election result showed. Nothing could be further from the truth but May et al have not repudiated this and are permitting this myth to become the message. Instead of promoting Brexit is Brexit they are busy installing a Remainer cabinet and workforce, and getting rid of effective Leave people. Apparently Hammond is key in all of this manoeuvring.

“The moment when the general election manifesto of the Labour Party was amended to include ‘freedom of movement will end as we leave the European Union’ was the moment when Theresa May’s campaign began to unravel. The two parties, having voted to invoke Article 50, had coalesced as far as the main aspects of Brexit, namely leaving the single market and ending the freedom of movement of labour.”

OK, since the general election there have been renewed attempts to pretend that the other EU leaders may still come to their senses and belatedly agree that the UK can control its immigration policy while staying in the EU single market – at one time Clegg was claiming that it would only need a bit of nimble diplomatic footwork to persuade them to agree to something which they had consistently and unequivocally refused both before and after the referendum – and some in Labour are now hinting that it might be possible to stay in a “reformed” EU single market, but they know very well that this is no more than a way to try to put some clear water between their party and the Tories, it is not going to happen.

You may wish to remind the former Chancellor that London is the capital of England, He questioned the other day as to why Londoners should pay their Taxes to the DUP for their support. I wonder what his former constituents think of his new found loyalties.

I’m very sorry it has come to this now that we are starting to turn against our own revered institutions- as far as I’m concerned the BBC is doing a good job at giving balanced reporting in very difficult circumstances. For those still not convinced, the writing is on the wall now, that we are not going to get our own way with the EU or even without the EU.

The world has moved on and the empire is not coming back- new relationships have formed between countries worldwide for trade that tends to be increasingly globally regionalised. We are not going to start large trading patterns again with new Zealand or Australia, these countries are too far away and have formed new relationships ever since 1973. Our future trading relationship will be with the very people who are on our doorstep the French and Germans etc.. so to deny this is delusional and dishonest- all we can do now is to have talks with the EU and iron things out so that we can get the best deal possible to suit our circumstances and possibly smoothen over any bad feeling but especially for our young peoples sake because they are the ones who really count in all of this.. the old ones will have passed on in a few years.. and that is why the BBC is so important and necessary- because it holds up a mirror up to ourselves

I live in Scotland, and so am subjected to the BBC’s constant pushing of Scotland, emphasis on Glasgow, etc. Also, we don’ t have ITV, but STV, which is a less good version of ITV. Sometimes there are programmes I want to watch, but then I find “Not available in Scotland”: instead there is a feature on single mothers in Dundee and how they can’t get by on their benefits, or some such. One of the good things about England is that they don’t have this parochial bias in their broadcasting. The BBC is the “British” broadcasting corporation, and in my view it shouldn’t pander to the different nationalisms, but should be uniform throughout the whole of Britain.

BBC – yes, demonstrably biased, but so are we all! What are ‘British Values’, for instance? The ‘Anti-Extremism legislation’ now under consideration by the government threatens the liberty of Christians. I understand there’s a possibility that if you don’t sign up, you will be excluded from public service. Many would thus be excluded, for their Biblical definition of marriage, and other issues, such as ‘origins’ – what does science really support – Special Creation or Evolution over billions of years? Why aren’t they both taught, as many scientists would wish? If ever there was a case of prejudice and bias, this is it. Given that Church Youth groups would also be scrutinized by Ofsted inspectors, they too will be affected. One excellent school in Sunderland that was closed down, despite appeals from parents and pupils to the Minister at the time (Nicky Morgan). Needless to say, the BBC would lead the charge, whilst, as ever, favouring a light touch on cultures that were alien to our country, until recently. You really couldn’t make it up!
Somehow, the British are self-effacing to a fault, which our ideological contestants exploit.
However, I’d not want to see ‘England’ trying to assert itself – time was when we were above that. I believe our postage stamps are the only ones in the world that show simply our Monarch – it is assumed they are English, British, UK! When we have to state otherwise, we really have lost it!

“The election coverage once again revealed the BBC’s disdain for England”

Sorry John but you could easily replace the word ‘BBC’ in that sentence with ‘politicians’. Not one of them, with the exception of our host of course, can even bring themselves to say the word England let alone acknowledge it, even when a great deal of what they are referring to nowadays only applies to England. “Don’t mention England” seems to be their motto. They are programmed to say ‘up and down the country’ instead so the English people will be duped, or so they believe, into thinking their austerity cuts and their dementia tax and £9,000 tuition fees affect everyone. That way England won’t notice the rotten deal only our young, sick and elderly are getting let alone the fact England is now the only country in the UK and western world without it’s own legislature. Where is our First Minister and Secretary of State? Who represents England when May is having her numerous discussions with the First Ministers of the devolved nations re. Brexit? No-one, that’s who.

The main parties have the same agenda when it comes to England, i.e. ignore it and with it the English Question and the WLQ. Instead they are trying to balkanise our nation out of existence with their regionalism and localism but on no terms must they allow England to be recognised as a whole. After all their own self interests and the Westminster gravy train are obviously far more important to them than a little matter like acknowledging the existence of England.

Never mind the BBC which is of course at fault and should change but Conservatives could take a lead by naming Ministers and departments ………for England’ if they can, EVEL and the administration of England being a mystery to me.

We are stuck on representative democracy aren’t we: to represent difference
We are stuck on multi-religiosity: to represent difference
We are stuck on multi-culturalism: to represent difference
We are stuck on devolution: to represent difference
We are stuck on multi-ethnicity to represent difference
So, we have today’s Parliament. It’s different isn’t it.

Well said Mr Redwood. But where is your campaign/lobbying to abolish the State funding of the BBC? If you look at the polling of the general public, there is a clear majority who do not support the BBC being State funded.

The ‘telly tax’ should be abolished. This needs a leader and who us a Conservative MP.

John, the BBC is biased beyond redemption. They will never listen to us, and they will never work within the terms of their charter. Accordingly, the first cuts should be right there – £6 Billion a year saved and our democracy will have a chance once again. (Trusting you realise how much damage the BBC did to the Conservative’s 20 point majority!)

I don’t know whether they are Corbynistas but these 2865 people with an average age of 33 are likely to be lost for Britain. And I would guess they are not “scroungers” but are likely to be educated people. After Brexit, the country will need more of these educated people than old f.rts spending their days on this website.
I just find your reaction simply ridiculous.

A very good reason to break the BBC up and sell it off. It is no longer fit to inform the UK of events. I never watch or listen to its drivel and get my NEWS from foreign outlets !!! Extraordinary for we British to have to do that.

John Major has got dressed up and come out. He’s putting all his eggs in one basket again and promoting the case of the foreign power of the EU and against his own people in Northern Ireland. Blair will be lifting his rock up soon and slivering out no doubt. They seem to appear together increasingly ,like dark clouds and your house flooded with water and toads.

An excellent piece but the BBC is another blindingly obvious area for radical change. There is little doubt from its behaviour as you eloquently describe and from ex employees that at best it is a left of centre media outlet. If it operated as a commercial entity, fine, just as the newspapers all lean one way or the other, but it is supposed to be neutral and fair. It should be privatised but no government has the bottle to do so, as with other anachronisms. You couldn’t make up the nonsense of the licence fee to own a TV and then risk being jailed for not paying it.

So where is the PMB to abolish this Dickensian debtors prison practice? If enacted the BBC would collapse, so I suppose that is my answer.

My thoughts entirely, it’s absolutely pathetic that they put the leaders of Plaid Cymru and the SNP in the debates when no-one outside of Scotland and Wales can vote for them. Then again, if May had got less seats and Corbyn could have cobbled together a ‘progressive’ alliance with them, then the UK might have seen itself being governed by the SNP & Plaid and in particular England, which predominately voted Tory, could have ended up having this leftie unaccountable alliance foist on it against it’s wishes dictating policy on English health, English education and English taxes etc. and if that had happened, one thing is certain John, not one of your colleague squatting in English seats would have uttered one word of protest at this affront to democracy. After all, they can’t mention England can they and the alternative would be to ask the people of England if they too would like a taste of the self determination that your colleagues are only too happy to advocate for the rest of the UK – just not England!!

The BBC was actively covering the election in a way to benefit Labour. In their morning programme run by women and named after a presenter, they managed to find the granddaughter of Emily Pankhurst and gave her time to make an impassioned speech urging everyone, including the young, to vote, as it was their last chance to change things. The day before polling they followed Corbyn around the country and covered his speeches for 20 minutes, while giving Mrs May a few words of waffle. They must plan their campaign and of course have far left journalists on their staff. If May was not such a drip she would launch an enquiry.

Only one week to go now before the talks begin..can’t wait until i see david davis in action..will he look sternly under his bushy eyebrows across the table at barnier while he twirls his glasses with his left hand jabbing the empty space with the index finger of his right hand..can’t wait to see what the response to this is going to be..hope it will by all telivised on BBC

At the very least, the BBC licence fee should be removed from the criminal justice system. it is outrageous that the criminal courts waste their time with licence fee prosecutions and it should be a civil offence. Poor people are jailed for being unable to pay the telly/radio tax. I’d abolish the fee entirely – let the BBC sink or swim on its merits, like the Guardian…

An interview with Sir Bill Cash on radio today, in which he gives the legal position regarding Brexit. He knocks on the head all this nonsense of a hokey- cokey Brexit with one foot in and one foot out! – segment begins 2 hrs 13 minutes into the programme – well worth a listen:

Much as I loathe the BBC and its works, I struggle to have any sympathy to be quite honest. It was recently in the hands of the Conservative Party to do something serious about the situation, but Whittingdale flunked it. At the time I assumed it was because Cameron wanted the BBC onside for the referendum, but I have since concluded it is much more complicated.

In particular, most politicians are simple tarts for power, navigate to any seat of power like moths to the proverbial, and crave attention. They also only think about the short term, and in that timeframe it is much more important to them to maximise their chances of being a talking head in the media. Campaigning to dismantle the most powerful such media outlet is clearly very unhelpful to their personal ambitions.

Just watched Major and what a perfectly useless contribution it was. As if we needed to be told that agreement with the DUP might entail risks in the details especially as he seemed to be saying that he did accept that an agreement had to be put in place given the non-existent alternatives, detailed risks or no. Nobody, at least not recently, said it would be easy. Of course the BBC lapped it up with lots of stuff about serious concerns.

We thought his performance descended into irrational ranting as he cast about looking for more and more reasons not to have an arrangement. Just like the near hysterical Jonathan Powell. The fact is they are remainiacs, and they want the May government to fall, even at the cost of putting in Corbyn. That is what the DUP are determined will not happen. They have been on the receiving end of his friends’ atrocities.

Before publicly criticising the BBC for excessive non-English coverage, perhaps you should discuss this with your colleagues the secretaries of state for Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales? Not England though. No such post exists.

Devolve power for the English regions, then ministers and MPs can call the kettle any colour they like.

I will be moving from where I live as in the last 2 years it has moved from being predominately indigenous to foreign speaking. When I walk to the supermarket for food 9 out of 10 conversations I hear are in languages that are not English. It was a very fast change.

I will be moving out into the English country side but that place is under threat already. Housing developments mean that country place will become part of a new build busy place in 10 to 20 years. Most others far quicker.

We intend moving further out shortly after as in not England, I think England will just be a homogenous busy violent and aggressive place in 10 to 20 years. I can’t see England surviving what is currently under way.

Parliament was weirder than usual. The nth degree of weirdness. The herd of elephants in the room is that Mrs May declared as the sole reason for the Election that she could not negotiate effectively, usefully, positively and with sufficient strength unless she had a bigger majority. Yet she still has not said: ” I cannot now negotiate. I therefore resign!”.

When is her resignation coming so we can negotiate with the EU? If she can in fact negotiate with the EU it means she was telling lies. If she was telling lies then the full cost of the Election should be billed to her and the bailiffs sent in if appororiate. In any event her presence in Parliamernt today should have been only by permission of Security in order perhaps to pick up a forgotten hat and coat.
She is an insult!

Lordy. I never realised that the only people who wrote on your blog were right wing nutters spouting nonsense.

I think that the BBC, along with other TV news broadcasters, does a pretty good job of being as fair as they can to the tripe that comes out of the right wing political and newspaper landscape we have to suffer.

In the real world the market has changed and in reality there are no jobs for life as market forces dictate.

Dragged kicking and screaming I care not but the BBC has outlived its usefulness and should be evicted from the public finances and sent forth to try and survive in the real world. I along with thousands think it will confined to the history channels with 5 years of being caste aside to make its own way in the real big wide world. it should have been broken up years ago. Like TM it is a dead man walking.

I could not agree more with your points re-BBC. It has become clear to me over many years that the BBC is certainly not impartial media, and any international respected status afforded is unjustified. Even Mr Trump was dismissive! Their selected panels, both speakers and audience alike virtually never demonstrate balanced population, and voting history. It is becoming as ridiculed as the worst of the gutter press.

It’s apparent that Mrs May watches the BBC news and has wrongly concluded that the Conservatives lost the election because of a non existent ‘hard Brexit’.

The same corporation that sneeringly refers to UKIP ers as ‘populist’ never uses the same term to describe Mr Corbyn with his magic money tree and shameless bribery…

InMrs May’s her mind her failure has absolutely nothing to do with the vacuous ‘a country that works for everyone’, ‘strong and stable leadership’ and her long record of getting away with complete and utter failure at the home office.

Mrs May – ‘I got us into this mess and I’ll get us out of it’

She is the political equivalent of a dose of Strychnine to the Conservative party. How can the party recover by being given a stronger dose of the same poison that made it sick?. Moving further to the left with Damian Green who is relaxed about uncontrolled immigration..
May is a politically correct, Labour leaning Blair admirer who had no answer to Jeremy Corbyn because she agrees with much of what he stands for.

Reply In the review so far of why the Conservative win was disappointing the party has not thought its stance on Brexit was the problem!

It seems odd that the pro remain Mr Barwell, after losing his seat should conclude that the policy towards Brexit was the problem. I would argue that his opinion has been endorsed by the party leadership with his appointment to government.

Mr Barwell told the BBC’s Nick Robinson that his party must learn the lessons of what had happened. ‘Brexit and Austerity cost us’.

And now we read that Remainer Hammond is reverting to type–It is hard to believe that the Party wore his being made No 2 in the first place, not to mention May being made No 1. It was absurd then and even more so now. It is very very very hard to believe that anybody could be so daft as to put taking away School Meals and means testing Winter Fuel etc in the Manifesto, repeat in the Manifesto. Obvious that such measures would be the kiss of death especially as never presented even vaguely competently. Why couldn’t such tertiary stuff have been left for the next Budget, that’s if they were needed at all, which they weren’t. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot or indeed both feet and totally gratuitously at that.

The DUP want the BBC License fee scraped could this account for the vitriol poured on them by that news organisation?

About John Redwood

John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.